City of Highland Park Plan & Design Commission met May 3.
Here are the minutes provided by the commission:
CALL TO ORDER
I. At 6:30 PM Chair Hainsfurther called the meeting to order and asked Director Fontane to call the roll.
II. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Quinlan, Kerch, Weil, Hecht, Moore, Hainsfurther
Members Absent: Bruckman
Director Fontane called the roll and declared a quorum present.
Staff Present: Burhop, Fontane
Student Rep.: None
Corporation Counsel: Martinez
Council Liaison: Stolberg
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
April 19, 2022 Regular Meeting
Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to approve the minutes of the April 19, 2022 meeting. Commissioner Hecht so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Weil.
On a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously.
IV. SCHEDULED BUSINESS
A. Design Review for 2900-3100 Trail Way (by the Park District) for Centennial Park Ice Arena with variations.
Planner Burhop made a presentation for the above item Centennial Ice Rick site area, proposed addition, proposed rendering, proposed parking lot changes, proposed lighting, proposed landscaping, variations, neighborhood and public comments.
Commissioner Quinlan stated they were given detailed interior elevations in the packet as part of the larger redesign.
Planner Burhop stated he would refer this to the applicant.
Chair Hainsfurther stated this was not part of the design review purview.
Commissioner Quinlan asked if the new entrance was in the context of interior renovation.
Planner Burhop stated it can be considered that.
Commissioner Hecht mentioned the drop off turnaround and if it will be where there is a sidewalk to the entrance.
Planner Burhop stated yes.
Commissioner Kerch asked if there is a parking requirement on site.
Planner Burhop stated yes, as determined by the zoning administrator. They are losing two spots for the whole site and the ADA is increasing from four to six.
Commissioner Kerch asked about the slide with the landscaping and asked if the lighter green is new.
Planner Burhop stated yes.
Vice Chair Moore stated she was concerned about the parking lot and how traffic will rotate around it. It is both directions in both aisles or counterclockwise. She was concerned if it is two-way traffic in both aisles.
Planner Burhop stated based on the dimensions submitted, it is complaint to be two-way.
Vice Chair Moore stated she was concerned someone was going to come to the entrance and make a left and drive on the bottom side and then try to make a left into the turnaround when others are trying to pull into the turnaround. She thought there could be difficulty at the entrance/exit of the turnaround if people are going both ways.
Chair Hainsfurther asked when they analyze the landscaping count do they take into account the whole park or just the area around ice rink. He did not understand why they are short plant material.
Planner Burhop stated they looked at the code and past practice and took the perimeter of the area of improvements which is a polygon of the two areas. The other areas are already existing.
Chair Hainsfurther asked if there was a requirement for internal landscape islands in a parking lot.
Planner Burhop stated that was one of the variations requested.
Chair Hainsfurther stated they have the two and should there be something in between.
Planner Burhop stated there are two on the north, the two in the middle which they proposed to remove which triggers the variation. They have none below.
Chair Hainsfurther asked if there had been other requests like this, or are they setting a precedent.
Planner Burhop stated the applicant wants to maximize the number of spaces within the parking area.
Chair Hainsfurther stated he did not want a Target or Walmart coming back and saying you did it for them, you should do it for us.
Planner Burhop stated he did not believe it sets a precedent and the context is unique. Director Fontane (unintelligible)
Councilman Stolberg stated the lighting at 4000K is a little bright from what they usually see.
Planner Burhop stated in most PUDs where zoning variations are sought the Commission and Council has held applicants to 3000K. The code says 2700K to 4100K is allowed.
Ms. Amalia Schwartz, Planning & Projects Mgr., Highland Park District, made a presentation including arena in one of 10 indoor facilities, serves the entire community, only rink in Highland Park, built in the 1970s and renovated in the 1990s, has dated feel and renovation will address operational challenges which are detrimental to patron experience, enhancements are looking to improving experience for users and those walking in the park, replacing open walkway with enclosed glass vestibule, relocating reception desk with new design and staff offices and multi-purpose room, allows for better experience and improved safety, turnaround will allow parents to drop off directly at front, lots need to be resurfaced, lighting is not adequate, arena serves community and hosts hockey tournaments, can go late into the night sometimes until midnight, using overflow lot on the north, by improving and increasing lighting they are improving experience, they feel they are different and requesting variation for removing two islands, need to maximize parking space which is often full, want to preserve open space, designed for two-way traffic, can look at arrows to orient traffic in one direction, lighting is for security on motion sensors, currently lights go on at 6 PM and off at 1 AM, lights will go on when there is activity, they are willing to making slight changes to landscape plan, swapping out seven shade trees and installing evergreen trees, Park District is excited to renovate facility, is of value to community, will enhance pedestrian experience, consistent with character and appearance of area and will bring value to Highland Park.
Chair Hainsfurther asked if there were materials for the addition.
Ms. Schwartz stated they were in her car. They have representatives from the architect and engineer.
Chair Hainsfurther stated they will want to see the samples.
Commissioner Kerch stated he was not clear on the parking and why they have to take out the islands to maximize the parking.
Ms. Schwartz stated there are 72 spaces in the south lot. It has four accessible spaces and they need to increase to six so that is reducing the number of regular spaces. It is still the same number of spaces. With the restriping they taking away some spaces.
Chair Hainsfurther asked if it is 72 plus four or 72 including.
Ms. Schwartz stated by redesigning the area and adding the spaces is how they came to 72.
Commissioner Kerch mentioned the flooding and the public comments. The north lot was under water on Sunday when was there. The path along west side of the soccer field also floods. He was curious if there is excess parking maybe is there is a way to help with the flooding by not having so much parking. He wanted to make sure they are doing all they can with the impervious spaces to mitigate the flooding.
Ms. Schwartz stated they are doing drainage improvements on the north lot. The improvements protect the building and the mechanicals. The area is a low path adjacent to a wetland and if the river is high and with a heavy storm there can be a problem. They can look at it. This is not part of this project, but a separate scope. They will look to see if they can address this, but it is not related to the scope of this project. Maybe they can look at a swale.
Planner Burhop mentioned grading, drainage and flooding questions and the applicant will have to get a permit. It has to stay equal or better and cannot get worse. These concerns are about something on the Park District and not private properties.
Commissioner Hecht stated there are no dimensions. He asked how wide it was at the narrowest point when you are coming in.
Ms. Mei Zhu, stated 24’ is one-way in and it should close to 40’.
Commissioner Hecht stated it did not look like 40’.
Chair Hainsfurther stated the dimension across the aisle near the entrance is 26’ and probably a little wider based on what he was looking at on page 24 of the packet. It is 31’ between the11’ drop off area and the 20’ bypass. It is 18’ at the narrowest point at the exit. It does not look wider than 26’. He was concerned given the traffic flow in the far left aisle, there is going to be conflict between a car exiting and a car wanting to turn in to that approach. He asked if it should all be one-way. He thought 30’ was adequate and you have to swing to get into the aisle which is tight as well.
Ms. Zhu stated they can run some other turn for the vehicle.
Chair Hainsfurther asked if they had buses.
Ms. Zhu stated yes.
Chair Hainsfurther asked if this was hammered out with Engineering during the permit process or something they should be looking for.
Planner Burhop stated it will require a building permit and reviewed to standards. The two-way aisle width requirement is 25.67’.
Chair Hainsfurther the aisle is not the issue, but the angle they are coming out at and having to turn to go south. The potential is someone headed north on the west aisle. How will a bus make a turn to go south.
Vice Chair Moore stated the shoulder between the exit of the turnaround and the two ADA spaces looks like a recipe for a problem for someone pulling out from one of these spaces and they are not going to be seen very well. She thought the spaces are too close to the exit. Maybe the island in the middle needs to be moved. The whole entry/exit to the turnaround looks like a problem.
Director Fontane stated maybe they need a traffic control device.
Vice Chair Moore stated they have to stop anyway.
Chair Hainsfurther stated it has to be a one-way.
Vice Chair Moore stated if there is anything that can be done to include in the design to force traffic to go in a specific direction and not rely on the signs it should be done here. The entrance to the traffic circle needs to have a division between the entrance and the exit.
Commissioner Hecht stated he had issues with cars going in and out and the angles necessary and they will come very close together and especially when there is a lot of traffic. He has noticed the drainage and it floods all the time. He asked if they are resurfacing both lots.
Ms. Zhu stated they are partially reconstructing the south lot. The north lot is being resurfaced.
Commissioner Hecht asked about the standing water.
Ms. Zhu stated going back to the flood plain, the field west of the building is in the FEMA flood plain. FEMA has a 100-year flood plain and the City is higher and includes the wetlands. The area is low and the parking lot slopes toward the SW corner and drainage is better than the north lot. They are installing a new storm sewer for the north lot which will improve the drainage. They looked at other options and one was to shift the entrance more to the angle so they traffic would be smoother but they would lose quite a few spaces.
Ms. Schwartz they weighed in the proximity to the athletic field and want to make sure there is enough distance. There are a lot of factors and they reviewed this with Engineering and looked at different geometries and making buses and fire equipment can get through. Safe passage of patrons is a high priority. The feedback she is hearing is to look at how to make it one-way traffic throughout the lot.
Commissioner Weil stated the paths look beat up and asked if they could address some of the more problematic areas of the paths.
Ms. Schwartz stated the paths shown in black will be resurfaced.
Commissioner Quinlan asked about the parking access and the geometry of the curves make it look like a figure eight. (unintelligible)
Ms. Schwartz stated it looked like he wanted to shift to the south.
Ms. Zhu stated they would have lost quite a few spaces.
Chair Hainsfurther stated there is a tree in the way.
Commissioner Quinlan asked if vertical bollards would help.
Chair Hainsfurther stated if there was some kind of barrier and if they could split that approach. He preferred a green space instead of a bollard.
Commissioner Hecht asked if every car had to go through the turnaround.
Chair Hainsfurther stated he was thinking about bringing the teardrop down more toward the crosswalk so the entrance was split from the exit.
Ms. Schwartz (unintelligible)
Councilman Stolberg (unintelligible)
Vice Chair Moore suggested they fool with the ADA spaces and the shoulder. If they have to find a space somewhere else so they can open up the shoulder and move on the spaces farther south. She thought they should strive to make it as safe as possible.
Chair Hainsfurther suggested taking the feedback to the traffic consultants. They need to have a discussion and work on this and look at options. The volume is high and it behooves them to make sure it is a safe environment. It is an accident waiting to happen and no one wants that. He understood the drop off and maybe it is a question of making it narrower. There is no sidewalk on the east side so people are going to be walking through the lot.
Mr. Schwartz stated they talked about this. They created a new walkway and allowed for people to get onto the path. They want to make it so people are not walking through the lot.
Chair Hainsfurther stated if he is parking by the lamp there is no way to get to that space other than walking through the lot. He thought the one-way traffic makes even more sense no matter if there is a sidewalk or crosswalk. He would rather see them improve the safety of the turnaround.
Ms. Schwartz stated the request is a for a variation for the two islands and asked to have some guidance.
Commissioner Weil stated the lot was a nightmare and she liked the idea of the one-way and angling the spaces. She asked if the turnaround going to take away pressure from the parking. She asked if they would need fewer spaces.
Chair Hainsfurther asked how they are going to make sure people don’t park for two minutes and walk their child into the facility and it turns into 15 minutes. He asked how they would police it.
Ms. Schwartz stated staff will monitor and see out of the vestibule. There will be times when they are unable to monitor it and it is hard.
Chair Hainsfurther stated it is hard to police and will be taken advantage of.
Ms. Schwartz stated they did plan for a few cars to stop there and traffic will still be allowed to move.
Chair Hainsfurther asked what will happen when cars clog it up and wind up with two across.
Ms. Schwartz stated she would pass this along to the operations staff.
Ms. Heather Lahood, Architect, made a presentation including the rendering was an earlier concept and it what is in the drawings now, the vestibule is insulated glass, frame is the smaller piece of metal an is clear anodized aluminum frame, panels that clad the awning are interlocking metal panels, seaming will be horizontal, fascia extends out from either end of the vestibule and this is part of the replacement of the existing EIFS fascia, system is failing and material will be applied after removing fascia, repairing waterproofing, panels are zinc, brick is existing.
Chair Hainsfurther stated the other frames look dark bronze.
Ms. Lahood stated they are dark bronze or black and the brick is the existing red brick.
Mr. Louis Schwartzman, Resident, stated he lives next to the park, flooding has been talked about, west walking path adjacent to rink floods, serves as entrance to park and exit to rink, floods when rains, prevents access to park, becomes iced and impassable, drainage issue needs to be fixed, great if fixed, lighting soccer field (unintelligible) better than what is there.
Chair Hainsfurther stated the code requires a zero foot candle at the lot line and requires all lights to shine down and be shielded. These light fixtures comply with the ordinances that govern. They may see the lights when they come on, but will not see the source and will not shine into a house.
Planner Burhop stated you cannot tell if it will not have an effect and there are no light variations being requested.
Chair Hainsfurther asked if they would have a problem with an approval being conditioned on them installing 3000K.
Director Fontane stated it is permitted in the code and the City has used 3000K. They have required others to use 3000K and have found using and 3000K in a public lot is a very good color temperature. It is less harsh and is not the same thing as brightness.
Mr. Schwartz stated they are open to exploring and changing that.
Chair Hainsfurther asked if they came back to come back with that knowledge. He would like to see it conditioned on 3000K. He asked if lights are on from dusk to dawn at 37% and then go up or do they shut off at a certain point in time.
Ms. Schwartz stated they are set to safety lights.
Chair Hainsfurther asked why they needed lights on at 3 AM.
Ms. Schwartz stated currently the existing lighting goes on at 6 PM and off at 1 AM. They are motion sensored and will be bright when there is activity and dim when there is not.
Chair Hainsfurther asked if it was 37% all the time.
Ms. Schwartz stated they can work with the lighting consultant to reschedule that. Vice Chair Moore asked how sensitive are they.
Chair Hainsfurther asked if they wanted to continue or vote tonight.
Chair Hainsfurther stated they will continue to the next meeting. The variations are about the landscaping islands being removed. He asked if anyone had a problem with removing them. No responses were voiced. Depending on how they solve the turnaround and traffic issue and making it one-way and how to control that, making sure there is not a conflict with the turnaround and it functions the way they would like to see it function, need to be answered and the other landscaping islands could be removed. The landscaping counts should be able to be resolved. He had no problem with the design of the vestibule. They need to come back and discuss how the turnaround going to work. They need to come back with information about the temperature of the lighting and if they can use 3000K. How will the lights function in terms of sensitivity to motion. How will they handle off hours when the space is not used.
Planner Burhop stated the next meeting is May 17th .
Commissioner Kerch asked if the Park District had not asked for relief on the tree islands would they have been able to get into the parking and turnaround question.
Chair Hainsfurther stated no.
Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to continue to May 17th. Commissioner Hecht so motion, seconded by Commissioner Kerch.
On a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously.
B. Design Review for 490 Skokie Valley Rd. (by Gregory Hundai) with variations.
Planner Burhop made a presentation for the above item including 490 Skokie Valley Rd., proposal, landscaping, proposed rendering, colors and materials, proposed elevations, design review standards, approval process and recommendation.
Chair Hainsfurther asked if there is an existing sign package as part of the development.
Planner Burhop stated yes. In the applicant’s materials they stated any approval is not for any signage.
Planner Burhop passed out the applicant’s materials.
Commissioner Quinlan asked if FAR was related to this.
Planner Burhop stated there is no FAR for the B3 district and no coverage requirement.
Mr. Greg Mauro, Applicant, thanked Planner Burhop for his assistance. He is also building a Genesis dealership north. Hyundai has updated their brand and the design is called Global Dealership Space Identity Program. It is a complete luxury band. He has been in Highland Park for 40 years as a dealership. In the early 2000s they took the building and made it into a Hyundai and Dodge franchise and evolved to Genesis. They ae splitting Genesis apart from it. The interior will have a bronzing which is an upgrade from the metal paneling. There are two entrances in front and it will be straight across with all new glass. The entrance will be in the middle. In the interior there are tree shaped columns. The service will have two doors with speed doors. The other addition on the northwest corner will be squared for a better delivery area for the batteries and require separate space. The additions in the NW corner in the back and front are where they are straightening out what looks like two towers. They are not looking to add signage and will be coming back for the monument signs. They have upgraded to LED lights. Aesthetically it will be nice gateway to Highland Park.
Commissioner Quinlan stated this is a proposal where everything is internal and does not trigger any questions for him.
Commissioner Weil stated it looks attractive and has an organic feeling. Commissioner Hecht stated it looked good.
Commissioner Kerch stated it looked good.
Vice Chair Moore stated it looks good and is distinguished from all the other dealerships.
Chair Hainsfurther stated he has dealt with major corporations and he knew the extent of care they put into their image and its importance.
Councilman Stolberg stated he lives around the corner and they have made improvements. This is a nice improvement without being overbearing on the site close to a neighborhood.
Chair Hainsfurther stated they realize the importance the dealership has on the economy and they appreciate their loyalty to the community and willingness to build a second dealership.
Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to approve the design as proposed remaining consistent with tonight’s presentation. Commissioner Hecht, seconded by Commissioner Weil.
Director Fontane called the roll:
Ayes: Quinlan, Kerch, Weil, Hecht, Moore, Hainsfurther
Nays: None
Motion passed 6-0.
C. Sign Variation (design review) for 431 Temple Ave. (by Garasi Restaurant, John des Rosiers).
Planner Burhop made a presentation for the above item including 431 Temple Ave., proposed sign, proposed renderings, sign code and standards, approval process and recommendation. The area of the sign is 21s.f. which is lower than what would be allowed for a wall sign.
Commissioner Quinlan asked if the sign and ROW discussions are exclusive.
Chair Hainsfurther asked what if they are granted the sign variation and do not get to use the sidewalk.
Director Fontane stated they are two independent decisions. The license has to do with the ROW and is before Council on May 9th.
Commissioner Quinlan stated currently they are allowed 10 tables with the existing ROW.
Chair Hainsfurther asked about the license.
Planner Burhop stated the outdoor seating is within the City ROW and can be approved administratively.
Chair Hainsfurther stated they have always had seating there before.
Director Fontane stated it was an administrative matter and why it is getting a special non-exclusive license is because there will be a permanent structure affixed to the ROW. In those cases a special non-exclusive license is needed to protect the City should it want those removed or for whatever reason. It is approved administratively.
Commissioner Weil stated she is thrilled it is coming and excited about it. She asked about the internal lighting and the neighbors across the street. She asked if it was illuminated during the day.
Chair Hainsfurther stated the petitioner could answer this.
Vice Chair Moore asked why they have these particular sign regulations and why they do not like projecting signs or internally illuminated signs.
Director Fontane stated staff does not have a problem with projecting signs and they are proposing changing the code to let be allowed by right. One of the reasons it was included in the code was to have additional control about how they are implemented.
They are generally done tastefully and are desirable from a pedestrian standpoint. Internal illumination is an aesthetic and in a pedestrian area it is viewed less attractive to have internally illuminated signs. It is just how they are illuminated.
Chair Hainsfurther stated he thought it was the visual pollution they were trying to get away from to give these areas some character. In this case it is in a residential area.
Vice Chair Moore stated since the time the regulations were adopted sign technology has changed a lot.
Chair Hainsfurther stated in this zoning district internal illumination is prohibited.
Planner Burhop stated yes and the only districts that are allowed are the highway commercial and one more.
Director Fontane stated you can illuminate just externally.
Chair Hainsfurther stated you can halo it.
Mr. John des Rosiers, Applicant, stated there is a lot of traffic on Waukegan Rd. which they are 40’ from. The sign they had was about 100 s.f. There are currently four regular lightbulbs that are about 100 watts each. It is more light than the new sign will generate at night. They will be reducing the amount of lumens than they are currently allowed. If
you are in the houses to the east and look west there are two large streetlamps at the corners that produce more light than their proposed sign. It is high end sign with beautiful materials designed to gently illuminate the wording and symbol at night. They tried to design something with a nice aesthetic that does not make the light pollution at the corner any worse. It creates visibility for the restaurant and the illumination is part of that. The style is in keeping with Asian restaurants. They want to put the sign up even if they do not get the awning approved. The sign gives them visibility and it is smaller than what they had before.
Commissioner Kerch stated the sign looks good and the night version is cool. He was not fond of the color of the awning.
Commissioner Hecht stated he had no questions.
Mr. des Rosiers stated the awning is more of a terra cotta.
Commissioner Weil stated the nighttime version eases her concerns about the brightness.
Commissioner Quinlan asked if there was any other signage that would identify the restaurant.
Mr. des Rosiers stated there is the sign and awning.
Commissioner Quinlan asked if there is a need for the lighting to be facing the residential side.
Mr. des Rosiers stated it is preferable for consistency and they are reducing amount of light and makes it more friendly to the community.
Commissioner Quinlan stated he was open to have more signage depending on the specific location and dimensions and the 10 s.f. is a reduction and you cannot see it from looking at it from the front unless you have the awning name. Waukegan and Temple are not at 90º and would it make sense to angle it.
Mr. des Rosiers stated he would take a look at it.
Vice Chair Moore stated she did not understand how the letters are black in the daytime and white at night.
Mr. des Rosiers stated it works that way and it is some technique with the way the materials are layered inside.
Chair Hainsfurther stated he concurred with Commissioner Quinlan that perhaps they may want to look at a bigger sign depending on dimensions which is not their purview as long as they meet the code. He had no problem with the blade sign. He wanted to be clear that at night the background does not show and the sign will go off when the restaurant is closed. He did not have a problem with the awning, but with the skirting and found it a little much. When you go to other places you see a fencing and people dining and it adds to the activity on the street and this blocks it off. He did not think it fit with everything else in this area. He thought it was more a barrier than he would like to see. He thought Council could take this into consideration. If they do it for the applicant, will they see them all over town.
Mr. des Rosiers stated they built a restaurant in west Lake Forest with a large awning and they have a 3’ tall wrap around. It is very well done with high end materials. One of the benefits is that it helps stop rain from running off the awning and into here the customers are dining. They have about 65 rains days over the summer and every day it rained the patio was filled. It is not an insignificant difference. They have customers coming when it is raining and they created a patio where they do not get wet. They have done it and it works very well.
Chair Hainsfurther thought planters could do the same thing and be more pedestrian friendly. He suggested they have conversation with the Council people.
Chair Hainsfurther motioned to approve the request as submitted. Commissioner Hecht so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Kerch.
Director Fontane called the roll:
Ayes: Quinlan, Kerch, Weil, Hecht, Moore, Hainsfurther
Nays: None
Motion passed 6-0.
V. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Next Regular Meeting - May 17, 2022
Planner Burhop stated there will be findings of fact for the Park Sheridan project, a special use permit for the 1535 Park Ave. West property, the Park District design review application and a design review for 600 Elm.
B. Case Briefing – None
Commissioner Kerch asked about the resubdivision at 230 Green Bay. He asked why Council denied the resubdivision.
Director Fontane stated it is a buildable lot as is. Council chose not to have two lots because it does not have frontage on a public way. That is an important element of the subdivision code and they did not want to grant a variance for fear that it might set an example that others night follow. It does have access easements. The lot has an easement from Stonegate and Green Bay. It is likely the Stonegate easement will be improved with a driveway and a home could be built on the property.
Commissioner Kerch asked if there was further discussion about lots in depth.
Director Fontane it is not a lot in depth because it does not have a stem. If approved they would recommend that it be held to that if it was approved for two lots.
Councilman Stolberg stated not granting it did not impose a hardship on the owner and it would have been self-inflicted and not having frontage could establish a precedent.
Director Fontane stated they did carry the caution of the dissenting members to Council. VI. BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC - None
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Hecht so motioned, seconded by Vice Chair Moore.
On a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously.
The Plan and Design Commission adjourned at 8:40 PM.
http://highlandparkil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=2693&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up